# Mozilla Acquires Anonym: "Raising the Bar for Privacy-Preserving Digital Advertising" **URL:** https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/mozilla-acquires-anonym-raising-the-bar-for-privacy-preserving-digital-advertising/18936 **Category:** General **Tags:** software **Created:** 2024-06-17T07:09:17Z **Posts:** 44 ## Post 1 by @Tech-Trooper — 2024-06-17T07:09:17Z Tl;Dr - Mozilla has acquired Anonym, a company specializing in privacy-preserving digital advertising technology. - Anonym’s technology securely combines encrypted data sets from platforms and advertisers for scalable, privacy-safe measurement and optimization. - The acquisition aims to reshape the digital advertising landscape, addressing consumer concerns and regulatory scrutiny. - Anonym’s approach involves matching data sets in a secure environment and using anonymized analytics and differential privacy algorithms. - Mozilla and Anonym believe advanced technologies can enable relevant advertising while preserving user privacy. - Anonym, founded in 2022, was backed by several venture capital firms and individual investors. > **[Mozilla Welcomes Anonym: Privacy Preserving Digital Advertising | The Mozilla...](https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/mozilla-anonym-raising-the-bar-for-privacy-preserving-digital-advertising/)** > > Mozilla has acquired Anonym, a trailblazer in privacy-preserving digital advertising. This strategic acquisition enables Mozilla to help raise the bar for --- ## Post 2 by @anon46412288 — 2024-06-17T07:33:17Z ![image](//forum-uploads.privacyguidesusercontent.com/original/2X/b/bf9323cf661687eda08e4807c94b39b4d7ca18a3.jpeg) well shit, hope this anonym company lives up to what it says. this is an evil timeline ffs. --- ## Post 3 by @jonah — 2024-06-17T08:07:28Z > Secure Environment: Data sets are matched in a highly secure environment, ensuring advertisers, publishers, and Anonym don’t access any user level data. > Anonym’s solution processes data from multiple parties in confidential computing environments. The anonymized outputs are used by ad platforms to create audiences and optimize ad campaigns. How I read this: “we take all your non-anonymized data, analyze it, and spit out anonymized buckets; but we totally pinky swear to never ever look at the data, only our _algorithm_ will” Potentially probably worse than the oft-ridiculed Google Privacy Sandbox :grimacing: Maybe it’s based on the (not good) Intel SGX or something, that’s what “confidential computing environments” sounds like to me. Hope I’m wrong about all this though. --- ## Post 4 by @anon48875053 — 2024-06-17T08:20:20Z Ads are bad. Nobody likes ads. Solution: f\*cking pay, contribute, or donate. Everyone is used to free stuff, which results in companies relying on ads to fund their work. --- ## Post 5 by @pinkandwhite — 2024-06-17T08:20:48Z Mozilla really just said “You either die a hero or live long enough to be the villain, and I ain’t dead yet”. Fuck it, I’m just gonna use Edge or something. If I have to fight my browser I might as well get good security :weary: --- ## Post 6 by @dngray — 2024-06-17T08:26:19Z I think I already have disabled this lol. No doubt this will use the omnibar [user.js/user.js at 6446d73cf572fcdf631534a5a51276a64eec4a2d · arkenfox/user.js · GitHub](https://github.com/arkenfox/user.js/blob/6446d73cf572fcdf631534a5a51276a64eec4a2d/user.js#L297) I just use the `sp` keyword for startpage, `d`, for duckduckgo,l and `g`, for google. You can then use bookmarks like so: - `https://www.startpage.com/do/dsearch?query=%s` - `https://duckduckgo.com/html&q=%s` - `https://www.google.com/search?q=%s&hl=en` ![3235617182](//forum-uploads.privacyguidesusercontent.com/original/2X/4/47aa6fc60d1ae17ec59a1e99d58c369e9d6e7cbd.png) Unfortunately though it’s really too difficult to tell what the scope of it will be though because that blog article reads like marketing speech. --- ## Post 7 by @anon46412288 — 2024-06-17T08:26:31Z Mozilla : _retains webRequest API in Firefox_ Also Mozilla : _buys an ad company_ ![image](//forum-uploads.privacyguidesusercontent.com/original/2X/4/491522dbbb7aebcfe0d3f146b92e758521d2cbbe.jpeg) --- ## Post 8 by @ingsoc — 2024-06-17T09:06:20Z It feels a little pointless to donate to a company that is paying the CEO $7M in salary, besides they are already getting a lot of money from Google. I don’t have a problem with them exploring less privacy invasive ad tech, it’s not like ads are going away. They are going to need other income sources, relying on Google to pay the bills is not sustainable in the long run. --- ## Post 9 by @jonah — 2024-06-17T09:11:36Z > [@ingsoc](#): > > exploring less privacy invasive ad tech ![image](//forum-uploads.privacyguidesusercontent.com/original/2X/d/d874fbeace4b673d488237c3c6565357bfb9a632.jpeg) --- ## Post 10 by @anon80779245 — 2024-06-17T09:38:36Z My controversial take is that I would prefer Mozilla following Brave’s path and having a successful ad business, than them closing or becoming too reliant on Google search money. --- ## Post 11 by @trkp2 — 2024-06-17T11:18:01Z As another commenter earlier pointed out, they wouldnt need to rely on Google’s money if they stopped paying their C-suite employees million-dollar salaries. I own a nonprofit and it’s insane to me how a nonprofit can give all that donated money to its employees instead of investing it back into building great products and services for the people who gave them the donations to begin with. --- ## Post 12 by @Milus — 2024-06-17T13:12:10Z I stopped my donations to Mozilla and Gnome. Mozilla because I don´t want my hard earned money going into the pocket of a CEO who is almost not caring about the products I donate for. And Gnome, because of their lack of transparency about the Copyright law suite. --- ## Post 14 by @Tech-Trooper — 2024-06-17T16:22:29Z All company CEOs are paid huge sums, so how will you find a good CEO to operate this huge organisation? Btw, Mozilla corporation and foundation are separate entities, so your donations do not go to the pocket of their CEO. --- ## Post 15 by @exaCORE — 2024-06-17T19:06:33Z Unfortunately, judging by from the reaction many people have when somebody puts a paywalled article in this forum, I doubt that will happen. --- ## Post 16 by @exaCORE — 2024-06-17T19:14:29Z I do think that ads aren’t going away on the internet any time soon, so if Mozilla can make a better paradigm for them it would be good. At the same time, I am worried that this will hurt user privacy. I think that ultimately, this is the outcome of the cutthroat internet business. Mozilla inc seems to be desperate to not be making massive losses (hence the litany of new products) [not to absolve them of responsibility if this new venture is harmful]. But in the current state of the internet and browser business, it seems that only amoral strategies have a chance at succeeding. I hope Mozilla doesn’t sacrifice their values in the search of profits. --- ## Post 17 by @trkp2 — 2024-06-18T00:03:16Z > [@Tech-Trooper](#): > > All company CEOs are paid huge sums, so how will you find a good CEO to operate this huge organisation? Btw, Mozilla corporation and foundation are separate entities, so your donations do not go to the pocket of their CEO. There are plenty of CEOs or talented people who can lead companies that don’t need a multi-million dollar salary. I’d bet even if they started looking at the people already working for Mozilla, somebody is capable and willing. Last time I checked, [Mozilla Corporation is the parent company of Mozilla Foundation](https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/moco/). It’s very naive to think that nonprofits and their parent corporations don’t co-mingle or borrow funding from one another. I’m not sure where you live, but living in such a capitalistic country like US, I see companies do this all the time. So yeah, the donations made to Mozilla do go to their CEOs in some way or another. --- ## Post 18 by @xe3 — 2024-06-18T00:13:11Z > [@trkp2](#): > > As another commenter earlier pointed out, they wouldnt need to rely on Google’s money if they stopped paying their C-suite employees million-dollar salaries. This gets said a lot, but the _development budget_ alone is ~220 million dollars a year and that excludes all non-development related costs of running a medium-large organization which does a lot more than just develop Firefox. The search partnership brings in \>400 million a year. ([details](https://assets.mozilla.net/annualreport/2022/mozilla-fdn-2022-fs-final-0908.pdf)) I doubt donations could realistically even cover 10% of the development cost on a good year, And that is just the cost of development, none of the other associated costs of running a medium-large tech organization which does a lot more than just develop Firefox. As a point of comparison, [Signal](https://signal.org/blog/signal-is-expensive/)–a _much_ smaller project–has ~50 million in annual expenses (roughly 12% of Mozilla’s expenses) and a staff of 50 (so only about 7% the size of Mozilla). > I don´t want my hard earned money going into the pocket of a CEO Just to be clear, your money _can’t_ go into the pocket of the CEO, because you _can’t_ donate to Mozilla Corp (this also means you can’t make donations to directly fund Firefox). Mozilla corporation is self-sustaining, and revenue positive, and because of its structure, any profit must be reinvested unlike with typical for profit companies. When you donate, you are donating to Mozilla _foundation_, and your money goes to funding their non-profit and charitable programs, advocacy and activism, research, scholarships, fellowships, and grants, and so forth. These are donations in the traditional charitable sense (donating to something you think makes society a little better), not a crowdfunding source for Firefox. --- ## Post 19 by @xe3 — 2024-06-18T00:14:35Z > [@trkp2](#): > > Last time I checked, [Mozilla Corporation is the parent company of Mozilla Foundation](https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/moco/). You’ve got that backwards. The corporation is fully owned by and subordinate to the non profit. From your link: > The Mozilla Corporation was established in August 2005 as a wholly owned taxable subsidiary that serves the non-profit, public benefit goals of its parent, the Mozilla Foundation, and the vast Mozilla community. --- ## Post 20 by @a_user — 2024-06-18T02:41:53Z > [@anon48875053](#): > > Solution: f\*cking pay, contribute, or donate. Orion doesn’t work on Linux, unfortunately. Though I guess my donation to Firefox didn’t help much :upside_down_face: --- ## Post 21 by @a_user — 2024-06-18T02:50:31Z > [@xe3](#): > > I doubt donations could realistically even cover 10% of the development cost on a good year, I don’t know. Of all projects, I think Firefox has a chance. Thunderbird gets in the range of 10 million a year in donations and it’s an _email client_. An email client many people haven’t even heard of. Most people have heard of Firefox. Maybe not 200 million, but I think they could get 100 million in donations. I’d donate if it actually meant anything. --- ## Post 22 by @xe3 — 2024-06-18T04:30:57Z > [@a_user](#): > > Thunderbird gets in the range of 10 million a year in donations and it’s an _email client_. That’s actually quite impressive and surprising, though it seems that isn’t representative. The average from [2017-2022](https://blog.thunderbird.net/2023/05/thunderbird-is-thriving-our-2022-financial-report/) (the last year donations were published afaict), is roughly 2.5 million per year, which is still surprisingly high for a rather niche piece of software. (but still less than 1% of what Mozilla would need to raise) But I wouldn’t draw any conclusions yet based on the single best year since being fully donor supported would require consistently raising enough money _every year_ (and having enough surplus to survive recessions and bad years). > Maybe not 200 million, but I think they could get 100 million in donations. I’d donate if it actually meant anything. I wouldn’t count on it, but I’d _love_ to be wrong. I do agree with you that Mozilla is better positioned to do so than most others in the space (with the exception of Wikipedia and maybe Signal), but I think even if they were really really really successful they’d fall short of the development budget on its own, and the development budget is just a little over half of the total expenditures. On the other hand, if Firefox were donation supported, and if everyone who uses Firefox would just consistently ~~donate~~ [voluntarily pay for software we benefit from], it would actually be pretty cheap (less than $1/per user/per month) to fully support Firefox through donations alone. I guess Signal will probably be a good case study to test/judge the feasability (albeit at a much smaller scale) once the one-time donations from Brian Acton are exhausted. --- ## Post 23 by @a_user — 2024-06-18T05:01:01Z > [@xe3](#): > > That’s actually quite impressive and surprising, though it seems that isn’t representative. The average from [2017-2022](https://blog.thunderbird.net/2023/05/thunderbird-is-thriving-our-2022-financial-report/) (the last year donations were published afaict), is roughly 2.5 million per year, which is still surprisingly high for a rather niche piece of software. (but still less than 1% of what Mozilla would need to raise) I thought it was a pretty good example because Thunderbird is a Mozilla project (again). We’ll have to see what the numbers are for 2023. Hopefully they publish them. The reason 2022 was such an exceptional year is explained in the blog post: > Before we discuss that, you might be wondering what we did differently to generate such a significant surge of support last year. > > At the end of 2021, we decided to make a bigger investment in communicating with you. That meant more frequent blog posts and [newsletters](https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/#mailing-list), daily engagement across our social media channels, and expanding the number of places we interact with you (like our relatively new [Mastodon account](https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/#mailing-list)). > > **We also attribute this amazing uplift to the release of Thunderbird 102, as well as a first-of-its-kind, in-app donation appeal at the end of year.** > > **In short, we learned that projects like ours can benefit greatly from simply asking for donations** , while simultaneously explaining how those donations will benefit the project – and ultimately, how they will benefit you. So let’s talk about that! I think Firefox gets around 2 million dollars in donations from users last I checked. But they don’t have a donation call-to-action in the browser like Thunderbird does. > [@xe3](#): > > but I think even if they were really really really successful they’d fall short of the development budget on its own, I think that’s fine. _Start_ with that. Now you have strong, diversified revenue sources. Then see if you can scale it up impossibly like Wikipedia does. --- ## Post 24 by @xe3 — 2024-06-18T06:00:58Z > [@a_user](#): > > I think that’s fine. _Start_ with that. Now you have strong, diversified revenue sources. Then see if you can scale it up impossibly like Wikipedia does. I’m not sure that it is possible to do incrementally like that because of division between the Foundation and the Corporation. I could be wrong, but my recollection is that the main limitation of the split model is that donations made to the non-profit cannot be transferred to the Corporation. The upside is that the corporation has more flexibility than the non-profit would have in terms of the revenue streams it is allowed to pursue. But this division seems like it would prevent any sort of _incremental_ shift towards a donation based model, and it would need to be all or nothing. It is entirely possible there are legal or financial solutions or workarounds that I’m unaware of. (better and fuller explanation [here](https://libreddit.eu.org/r/firefox/comments/ow9k0y/comment/h7haanz/)) --- ## Post 25 by @ingsoc — 2024-06-18T10:00:35Z Where does it say they are tracking users? They have added an option in Firefox to allow sharing of measurements, and the website says they use differential privacy to anonymize user data. There isn’t a lot of actual data on the website about their tech, so this is just me guessing. It sounds more like they are using the browser to collect data points, which can be anonymized and send to their ad tech ML engine, and the final result is some sort of prediction of purchase intent that the website can use to serve ads. It doesn’t seem impossible they can do this without tracking users or sharing personal information. --- ## Post 26 by @jonah — 2024-06-18T11:21:28Z > [@ingsoc](#): > > using the browser to collect data points this is what we in the business call: “tracking” --- ## Post 27 by @anon48875053 — 2024-06-18T15:29:49Z > [@a_user](#): > > Though I guess my donation to Firefox didn’t help much :upside_down_face: That’s the wrong way of thinking. If a million people think that their 1€ donation is pointless, then project receives 0€ in donations. If a million people think that their 1€ is important and donates it, then the project receives 1.000.000€ in donations. --- ## Post 28 by @imls — 2024-06-18T15:49:52Z i do that too, its an amazing feature. But its a pain i had to enable in about:config an option to let me add search shortcuts --- ## Post 29 by @anon86552080 — 2024-06-18T16:21:06Z That’s interesting. I’m seeing some negative comments on Mozilla lately, should I stop using Firefox as my account login browser ? --- ## Post 30 by @xe3 — 2024-06-18T17:38:25Z > [@anon86552080](#): > > I’m seeing some negative comments on Mozilla lately, should I stop using Firefox as my account login browser ? Only if you have a clear reason to that makes sense to you. The privacy space often skews towards negativity, high bars of purity, and jumping to conclusions. If you let the dominant sentiment of the group in any given moment effect your decisions _too much_, you’ll be jumping around fairly often. I have a personal rule I try to stick to, where if I can’t clearly verbally articulate a reason to use or to not use a tool, I don’t make a change until I can. I find this prevents a lot of my impulsive changes and filters out a lot of the shortterm hyperbole and fud, and forces me to learn a bit. I recommend you find a browser you like and have at least moderate trust in, then stick with that, and work to inform yourself/keep up to date with changes. Reassess as needed. In this specific case, I don’t think there is enough information available yet for any of us to really have a very informed opinion at this point. So what you are largely seeing here is people interpreting this through the lens of their pre-existing impression of Mozilla, of Firefox, etc, and projecting that subjective impression onto the current situation (myself included). Because of this we all see things a little differently. In a few weeks or months there will likely be more solid info to form an opinion from. I personally have enough mostly positive history with Mozilla to extend them more of a benefit of the doubt than I would a company I’m less familiar with. That trust is nowhere near unconditional, but I do trust that they will (1) generally have their heart in the right place, even when they get something wrong in my eyes (2) be fairly transparent and upfront (3) give me control over my own browser, make it relatively straightforward to disable any feature I don’t want (4) to earnestly care and work towards the values and goals in their manifesto which includes many of the things I care about personally (individual privacy, net neutrality, open source/open standards and an open web, promoting a friendly/inclusive/diverse/human-centric web) They won’t always get things right, but in my experience they often do, and they rarely get things horribly wrong. We’ll see how this plays out. --- ## Post 31 by @donutfreak — 2024-06-18T17:41:15Z Mozilla Foundation \<\> Mozilla Corporation. Mozilla Foundation donations don’t really go where one might think they are going. On the [Donation Page](https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/donate/help/?form=donor-care-intake) there is a [FAQ](https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/donate/help/#frequently-asked-questions) that has a section of “How will my donation be used?” which points to [this page,](https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/what-we-do/) that has no mention of Firefox, at all. --- ## Post 32 by @xe3 — 2024-06-18T17:48:35Z That is my understanding as well. As far as I understand, donating to Mozilla = funding their broader mission, and initiatives, and all the traditional non-profit work that they do. If the goal is financially contributing to Firefox, and/or reducing dependence on the search deal, then subscribing to one of the paid services that has been introduced in large part for this reason (reducing dependence on a single revenue stream) is the way to do this (because those paid services fall under the Corporation not the Foundation). E.g. Mozilla VPN, Firefox Relay, Pocket Premium, etc --- ## Post 33 by @donutfreak — 2024-06-18T17:55:05Z I’d prefer (with what little I know) for Firefox to have something like Thunderbird has set up for their funding. Essentially, some independence of sorts. But then that Firefox/Google agreement is sort of in the way and tied into the Foundation. --- ## Post 34 by @xe3 — 2024-06-18T17:59:35Z I’m not very familiar with T-bird or how its funding works (beyond what was stated earlier in this thread) ~~or whether it falls under the foundation the corporation, or neither.~~ [It appears](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Foundation#MZLA_Technologies_Corporation) to fall into the ‘neither’ category (since 2020, it was moved from the Foundation to a new and separate corporate structure MZLA Technologies Co.) ([announced](https://blog.thunderbird.net/2020/01/thunderbirds-new-home/) on the Thunderbird blog) > [@donutfreak](#): > > and tied into the Foundation. What do you mean by that? --- ## Post 35 by @donutfreak — 2024-06-18T21:54:29Z I could be wrong, but I was under the impression the Google contract Mozilla has to set Search (and probably the Safe Search/Phishing feature) in the browser fed back to the Foundation. --- ## Post 36 by @xe3 — 2024-06-18T22:33:31Z I’m still not 100% clear what you mean when you say it is ‘fed back’ or ‘tied into’ the Foundation. Are you saying that you think the contracts for the search deal(s) are handled by the non-profit foundation? If so, so that would surprise me, since I think the main reason the Corporation was created was to allow for Firefox to pursue commercial revenue streams like the search deal that the non-profit foundation apparently couldn’t. I believe that the Corporation does pay some royalties to the Foundation, and much of that would come from income derived from the search deals (but the royalties are something like ~2-5% of total revenue). My understanding of all this is pretty imperfect so I could be missing or misunderstanding something, --- ## Post 38 by @hayhorse123 — 2024-06-19T07:18:50Z haha i dont think all that 400 million is for developing browser > **[Introducing Mozilla.ai: Investing in trustworthy AI | The Mozilla Blog](https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/introducing-mozilla-ai-investing-in-trustworthy-ai/)** > > We’re committing $30M to build Mozilla.ai: A startup — and a community — building a trustworthy, independent, and open-source AI ecosystem. We’re o Mozilla could easily switch to a donation based nonprofit. as someone said Thunderbird alone gets 10 million in donations. you think they cant develop firefox and get some infrastructure to support development with 10 or 20 million$? what a joke. so much bloat these days. but nah they want to pay ceo 7 million a year and do 30$million Ai Slop trash :rofl::rofl::rofl: --- ## Post 39 by @exaCORE — 2024-06-19T07:24:50Z > [@hayhorse123](#): > > you think they cant develop firefox and get some infrastructure to support development with 10 or 20 million$? what a joke. so much bloat these days. That’s really easy to say as an observer… However your statement is not backed up by data --- ## Post 40 by @anon80779245 — 2024-06-19T11:15:21Z Just want to add that Thunderbird is not a niche product. A small company I worked for used it. Millions install everyday. [https://stats.thunderbird.net/](https://stats.thunderbird.net/) --- ## Post 41 by @anon46412288 — 2024-06-19T13:14:31Z > [@donutfreak](#): > > On the [Donation Page](https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/donate/help/?form=donor-care-intake) there is a [FAQ](https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/donate/help/#frequently-asked-questions) that has a section of “How will my donation be used?” which points to [this page,](https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/what-we-do/) that has no mention of Firefox, at all. I think the main problem is Mozilla Corporation is _for-profit_, so Mozilla Foundation can’t share the money to Mozilla Corporation. --- ## Post 42 by @anon46412288 — 2024-06-19T13:24:06Z Actually, this Mozilla AI is being used for genuinely useful accessibility features - [Experimenting with local alt text generation in Firefox Nightly - Mozilla Hacks - the Web developer blog](https://hacks.mozilla.org/2024/05/experimenting-with-local-alt-text-generation-in-firefox-nightly/) The whole split is really interesting - some people mentioned Thunderbird here. According to Mozilla themselves - Mozilla Foundation is the main non-profit that owns various for-profits such as Mozilla Corporation (the Firefox developers), MZLA Technologies (the Thunderbird developers), Mozilla.ai (an LLM model developer), and somehow, mozilla.vc (a venture capitalist fund thing???) Also, all of these act as their own separate companies of sorts - for example, donating to Thunderbird donates to the for-profit MZLA Technologies company (as stated here - [https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/donate/](https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/donate/)), not to the Mozilla Foundation - [Homepage - Mozilla Foundation](https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/?form=donate-header). So Mozilla Corporation is not influenced by Mozilla.vc, and MZLA is not influenced by Mozilla Corpo. --- ## Post 43 by @xe3 — 2024-06-19T14:55:08Z Suggesting its possible to do cheaper is reasonable, suggesting it can be done for 95-98% cheaper is not a serious suggestion. > haha i dont think all that 400 million is for developing browser [mozilla ai] - Mozilla.ai is a _separate company_ announced in 2023. The numbers I’m looking at are from 2022 and earlier. Mozilla.AI is not a factor. > Thunderbird alone ~~gets 10 million~~ in donations - Thunderbird _got_ 6.4 Million, _once_ - Thunderbird is also not one of Mozilla Corporations products. - Thunderbird is downstream of Firefox, they base off of Firefox ESR so they are externalizing some of the development and non-development costs. > you think they cant develop Firefox and get some infrastructure to support development with 10 or 20 million? what a joke. Yeah I think that is absolutely out of the question and silly to suggest… Building a browser is a huge project. I’m sure there are ways to cut costs, But suggesting without evidence that they should be able to easily cut expenditures by ~97% is silly. But if you think you can. Go for it. If you can build and maintain a better browser for 10-20 million you should… That would be an amazing accomplishment. --- ## Post 44 by @ph00lt0 — 2024-06-19T15:06:09Z Privacy preserving ads, yeah right. Ads privacy-friendly or not are invasive. I did not consent to seeing that crap, having my brain been influenced by the rubbish companies try to sell us is just a terrible thing alone. It’s not the consumers who crafted this model, it’s the companies themselves who became space invaders. So you should not feel bad for blocking them making money this way. > **[A Campaign to Take Back Public Spaces From Ads](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfpyrSP8pG8)** > > It’s a little past 3 p.m. in Manhattan, and Jordan Seiler is getting ready for his next public-ad intervention. He uses a homemade key he forged earlier from...